Effect of Patient Navigation on Completion of Lung Cancer Screening in Vulnerable Populations.

BACKGROUND: Although low-dose, CT-based lung cancer screening (LCS) can decrease lung cancer mortality in high-risk individuals, the process may be complex and pose challenges to patients, particularly those from minority underinsured and uninsured populations. We conducted a randomized controlled trial of telephone-based navigation for LCS within an integrated, urban, safety-net health care system. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients eligible for LCS were randomized (1:1) to usual care with or without navigation at Parkland Health in Dallas, Texas. The primary endpoint was completion of the first 3 consecutive steps in a patient's LCS process. We explored differences in completion of LCS steps between navigation and usual care groups, controlling for patient characteristics using the chi-square test. RESULTS: Patients (N=447) were randomized to either navigation (n=225) or usual care (n=222). Mean patient age was 62 years, 46% were female, and 69% were racial/ethnic minorities. There was no difference in completion of the first 3 steps of the LCS algorithm between arms (12% vs 9%, respectively; P=.30). For ordered LCS steps, completion rates were higher among patients who received navigation (86% vs 79%; P=.03). The primary reason for step noncompletion was lack of order placement. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, lack of order placement was a key reason for incomplete LCS steps. When orders were placed, patients who received navigation had higher rates of completion. Clinical team education and enhanced electronic health record processes to simplify order placement, coupled with patient navigation, may improve LCS in safety-net health care systems.

Geographic Accessibility and Completion of Initial Low-Dose CT-Based Lung Cancer Screening in an Urban Safety-Net Population.

BACKGROUND: Recent modifications to low-dose CT (LDCT)-based lung cancer screening guidelines increase the number of eligible individuals, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities. Because these populations disproportionately live in metropolitan areas, we analyzed the association between travel time and initial LDCT completion within an integrated, urban safety-net health care system. METHODS: Using Esri's StreetMap Premium, OpenStreetMap, and the r5r package in R, we determined projected private vehicle and public transportation travel times between patient residence and the screening facility for LDCT ordered in March 2017 through December 2022 at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, Texas. We characterized associations between travel time and LDCT completion in univariable and multivariable analyses. We tested these associations in a simulation of 10,000 permutations of private vehicle and public transportation distribution. RESULTS: A total of 2,287 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 1,553 (68%) completed the initial ordered LDCT. Mean age was 63 years, and 73% were underrepresented minorities. Median travel time from patient residence to the LDCT screening facility was 17 minutes by private vehicle and 67 minutes by public transportation. There was a small difference in travel time to the LDCT screening facility by public transportation for patients who completed LDCT versus those who did not (67 vs 66 min, respectively; P=.04) but no difference in travel time by private vehicle for these patients (17 min for both; P=.67). In multivariable analysis, LDCT completion was not associated with projected travel time to the LDCT facility by private vehicle (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.82-1.25) or public transportation (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.89-1.44). Similar results were noted across travel-type permutations. Black individuals were 29% less likely to complete LDCT screening compared with White individuals. CONCLUSIONS: In an urban population comprising predominantly underrepresented minorities, projected travel time is not associated with initial LDCT completion in an integrated health care system. Other reasons for differences in LDCT completion warrant investigation.

Evaluating implementation of a community-focused patient navigation intervention at an NCI-designated cancer center using RE-AIM.

BACKGROUND: Patient navigation is an evidence-based intervention that reduces cancer health disparities by directly addressing the barriers to care for underserved patients with cancer. Variability in design and integration of patient navigation programs within cancer care settings has limited this intervention's utility. The implementation science evaluation framework, RE-AIM, allows quantitative and qualitative examination of effective implementation of patient navigation programs into cancer care settings. METHODS: The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was used to evaluate implementation of a community-focused patient navigation intervention at an NCI-designated cancer center between June 2018 and October 2021. Using a 3-month longitudinal, non-comparative measurement period, univariate and bivariate analyses were conducted to examine associations between participant-level demographics and primary (i.e., barrier reduction) and secondary (i.e., patient-reported outcomes) effectiveness outcomes. Mixed methods analyses were used to examine adoption and delivery of the intervention into the cancer center setting. Process-level analyses were used to evaluate maintenance of the intervention. RESULTS: Participants (n = 311) represented a largely underserved population, as defined by the National Cancer Institute, with the majority identifying as Hispanic/Latino, having a household income of $35,000 or less, and being enrolled in Medicaid. Participants were diagnosed with a variety of cancer types and most had advanced staged cancers. Pre-post-intervention analyses indicated significant reduction from pre-intervention assessments in the average number of reported barriers, F(1, 207) = 117.62, p < .001, as well as significant increases in patient-reported physical health, t(205) = - 6.004, p < .001, mental health, t(205) = - 3.810, p < .001, self-efficacy, t(205) = - 5.321, p < .001, and satisfaction with medical team communication, t(206) = - 2.03, p = .029. Referral patterns and qualitative data supported increased adoption and integration of the intervention into the target setting, and consistent intervention delivery metrics suggested high fidelity to intervention delivery over time. Process-level data outlined a successful transition from a grant-funded community-focused patient navigation intervention to an institution-funded program. CONCLUSIONS: This study utilized the implementation science evaluation framework, RE-AIM, to evaluate implementation of a community-focused patient navigation program. Our analyses indicate successful implementation within a cancer care setting and provide a potential guide for other oncology settings who may be interested in implementing community-focused patient navigation programs.

Collaborative depression care sensitive to the needs of underserved patients with cancer: Feasibility, acceptability and outcomes.

PURPOSE: A single-arm trial evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, and outcomes of COPE-D, a collaborative care intervention for underserved cancer patients with depression. METHODS: Bilingual (Spanish and English) care managers provided counseling and/or medication management in consultation with physicians. Outcomes were treatment improvement (≥ 5-point reduction in PHQ-9), treatment response (≥ 50% reduction in PHQ-9), suicidal ideation resolution, and changes in depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-2), sleep disturbance (PSQI), global mental and physical health (PROMIS), social isolation (PROMIS), and qualitative feedback. RESULTS: 193 patients consented to participate. 165 initiated and 141 completed treatment, with 65% and 56% achieving treatment improvement and response, respectively. Outcomes did not differ by ethnicity (31% Hispanic), cancer stage (71% stages III-IV), income, or education. Suicidal ideation, depression, anxiety, sleep disturbance, and social isolation also improved. Qualitative feedback was largely positive. CONCLUSION: COPE-D improved depression and quality of life among underserved patients, with acceptable retention rates.

Considering depression as a secondary outcome in the optimization of physical activity interventions for breast cancer survivors in the PACES trial: a factorial randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms result in considerable burden for breast cancer survivors. Increased physical activity may reduce these burdens but existing evidence from physical activity interventions in equivocal. Furthermore, physical activity intervention strategies may differentially impact depressive symptoms, which should be considered in designing and optimizing behavioral interventions for breast cancer survivors. METHODS: The Physical Activity for Cancer Survivors (PACES) trial enrolled 336 participants breast cancer survivors, who were 3 months to 10 years post-treatment, and insufficiently active (< 150 min of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per week). Participants were randomly assigned to a combination of 4 intervention strategies in a full-factorial design: 1) supervised exercise sessions, 2) facility access, 3) Active Living Every Day, and 4) Fitbit self-monitoring. Depressive symptoms were assessed at baseline, mid-intervention (3 months), and post-intervention (6 months) using the Quick Inventory for Depressive Symptoms. Change in depressive symptoms were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects model. RESULTS: Results from the linear mixed-effects model indicated that depressive symptoms decreased significantly across the entire study sample over the 6-month intervention (F = 4.09, p = 0.044). A significant ALED x time interaction indicated participants who received the ALED intervention experienced greater reductions in depressive symptoms (F = 5.29, p = 0.022). No other intervention strategy significantly impacted depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The ALED intervention consists of strategies (i.e., goal setting, social support) that may have a beneficial impact on depressive symptoms above and beyond the effect of increased physical activity. Our findings highlight the need to consider secondary outcomes when designing and optimizing physical activity interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03060941. Posted February 23, 2017.

Poor Subjective Sleep Quality Among Patients with Cancer and Comorbid Depression: An Opportunity to Inform Screening and Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: Sleep disturbances are under-identified and under-treated in oncology settings, especially for underserved populations and those with psychiatric comorbidities. This study examined the prevalence and correlates of poor subjective sleep quality as well as clinical sleep recommendations among a socioeconomically and ethnically diverse population of patients with cancer referred for depression management. METHODS: Participants were 140 adults with cancer who screened positive for depression through routine, practice-based assessment with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9 ≥ 8) and were referred to a study of collaborative care for depression. Demographics, clinical characteristics, subjective sleep quality, and sleep recommendations received were self-reported by patients prior to intervention. Sleep quality was measured using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), general health status was measured using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global-10, and depressive symptoms were measured using the PHQ-9. RESULTS: Of 138 patients with complete data, 123 (89.1%) reported poor sleep quality, and 87 (63%) met the threshold for possible insomnia. The strongest correlates of poor subjective sleep were female gender (ß = 0.19, p = .02), greater depressive symptom severity (ß = 0.28, p = .001), and worse physical health (ß = -0.19, p = .04). Of 118 patients reporting problems with sleep since their cancer diagnosis, 95 discussed the issue with a medical provider; medications were recommended most often (37; 38.9%); only 9 (9.5%) received recommendations for cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) or other CBT. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer seeking treatment for depression report very high rates of poor subjective sleep quality and insomnia, underscoring the importance of providing and referring to guideline-concordant sleep interventions in oncology supportive care contexts.

Lung Cancer Screening Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Patterns Among Primary and Pulmonary Care Clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening has the potential to identify lung cancer at an early stage when more treatment options exist. However, discussions with and referrals of screening-eligible patients remain unacceptably low. We need to better understand clinician knowledge, attitudes, and practice patterns to identify strategies to improve lung cancer screening uptake. Prior studies have focused on understanding these factors from physicians only. Nevertheless, many patients receive primary care from nurse practitioners and physician assistants where prevention and early detection conversations are most likely to occur. Therefore, we must engage the full range of clinicians treating screening-eligible patients. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe attitudes, beliefs and referral practice patterns, lung cancer screening knowledge, and concordance with lung cancer screening guidelines among nurse practitioners, physicians, and physician assistants in the United States. METHODS: A descriptive, cross-sectional study was performed using survey methodology with clinical vignettes to examine clinician factors and concordance with U.S. Preventive Services Task Force lung cancer screening guidelines. RESULTS: Participants scored low on attitudes toward shared decision-making, high on the importance of shared decision-making in lung cancer screening, and low on barriers to lung cancer screening referral. In addition, midrange scores on empathy toward patients with smoking history were noted. Lung cancer screening knowledge was low regardless of clinician specialty; the most endorsed response when presented with a hypothetical patient was to refer for lung cancer screening using a chest X-ray. DISCUSSION: Findings demonstrate that most clinicians are nonconcordant with U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines, erroneously believing a chest X-ray is appropriate for lung cancer screening. Clinicians must follow evidence-based practice guidelines, highlighting the need for targeted continuing education about lung cancer screening for clinicians who treat screening-eligible patients.

Empathic Communication and Implicit Bias in the Context of Cancer Among a Medical Student Sample.

Oncology clinicians often miss opportunities to communicate empathy to patients. The current study examined the relationship between implicit bias (based on cancer type and ethnicity) and medical students' empathic communication in encounters with standardized patients who presented as Hispanic (lung or colorectal) individuals diagnosed with cancer. Participants (101 medical students) completed the Implicit Association Test (IAT) to measure implicit bias based on cancer type (lung v. colorectal) and ethnicity (Hispanic v. non-Hispanic White). Empathic opportunities and responses (assessed by the Empathic Communication Coding System; ECCS) were evaluated in a mock consultation (Objective Structured Clinical Examination; OSCE) focused on smoking cessation in the context of cancer. Among the 241 empathic opportunities identified across the 101 encounters (M = 2.4), 158 (65.6%) received high empathy responses from the medical students. High empathy responses were most frequently used during challenge (73.2%) and emotion (77.3%) opportunities compared to progress (45.9%) opportunities. Higher levels of implicit bias against Hispanics predicted lower odds of an empathic response from the medical student (OR = 3.24, p = .04, 95% CI = 0.09-0.95). Further work is needed to understand the relationship between implicit bias and empathic communication and inform the development of interventions.

Developing an ACT-based intervention to address lung cancer stigma: Stakeholder recommendations and feasibility testing in two NCI-designated cancer centers.

Objective: Few psychosocial interventions have been tailored to meet the unique needs of patients diagnosed with lung cancer. This pilot study developed and tested a six-week intervention for reducing lung cancer stigma.Design and Subjects: Guided by qualitative interviews conducted with 9 lung cancer patients and 5 thoracic oncology care providers, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy was adapted for treatment of lung cancer stigma (ACT-LCS). In a subsequent single arm pilot study, 22 lung cancer patients reporting high levels of stigma completed the intervention.Setting: NCI-designated cancer centers in the Southwestern and Eastern United States.Results: Of 46 eligible patients, 22 provided consent, with 20 completing the intervention (10 in-person, 10 telehealth). Overall stigma decreased across timepoints, largely driven by reductions in internalized stigma. There were also significant reductions in social isolation, sleep disturbance, and fatigue.Conclusions: The ACT-LCS protocol demonstrates preliminary feasibility and acceptability. This intervention may be particularly suited for helping patients navigate feelings associated with internalized stigma.

Implementing patient navigation programs: Considerations and lessons learned from the Alliance to Advance Patient-Centered Cancer Care.

BACKGROUND: Six multidisciplinary cancer centers were selected and funded by the Merck Foundation (2017-2021) to collaborate in the Alliance to Advance Patient-Centered Cancer Care ("Alliance"), an initiative to improve patient access, minimize health disparities, and enhance the quality of patient-centered cancer care. These sites share their insights on implementation and expansion of their patient navigation efforts. METHODS: Patient navigation represents an evidence-based health care intervention designed to enhance patient-centered care and care coordination. Investigators at 6 National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers outline their approaches to reducing health care disparities and synthesize their efforts to ensure sustainability and successful transferability in the management of patients with cancer and their families in real-world health care settings. RESULTS: Insights are outlined within the context of patient navigation program effectiveness and supported by examples from Alliance cancer center sites: 1) understand the patient populations, particularly underserved and high-risk patients; 2) capitalize on the existing infrastructure and institutional commitment to support and sustain patient navigation; and 3) build capacity by mobilizing community support outside of the cancer center. CONCLUSIONS: This process-level article reflects the importance of collaboration and the usefulness of partnering with other cancer centers to share interdisciplinary insights while undergoing intervention development, implementation, and expansion. These collective insights may be useful to staff at other cancer centers that look to implement, enhance, or evaluate the effectiveness of their patient navigation interventions.

Implicit biases in healthcare: implications and future directions for gynecologic oncology.

Health disparities have been found among patients with gynecologic cancers, with the greatest differences arising among groups based on racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic factors. Although there may be multiple social barriers that can influence health disparities, another potential influence may stem from healthcare system factors that unconsciously perpetuate bias toward patients who are racially and socioeconomically disadvantaged. More recent research suggested that providers hold these implicit biases (automatic and unconscious attitudes) for stigmatized populations with cancer, with emerging evidence for patients with gynecologic cancer. These implicit biases may guide providers' communication and medical judgments, which, in turn, may influence the patient's satisfaction with and trust in the provider. This narrative review consolidated the current research on implicit bias in healthcare, with a specific emphasis on oncology professionals, and identified future areas of research for examining and changing implicit biases in the field of gynecologic oncology.

Patient-reported financial toxicity, quality of life, and health behaviors in insured US cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Fighting cancer is a costly battle, and understanding the relationship between patient-reported financial toxicity (FT) and health outcomes can help inform interventions for post-treatment cancer survivors. METHODS: Stages I-III solid tumor, insured US cancer survivors (N = 103) completed a survey addressing FT (as measured by the standardized COST measure) and clinically relevant health outcomes (including health-related quality of life [HRQOL] and adherence to recommended survivorship health behaviors). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to assess demographic and disease-specific correlates of FT, and to assess the predictive value of FT on HRQOL and adherence to survivorship health behaviors. RESULTS: Approximately 18% of respondents noted FT levels associated with significant financial burden. In univariate analyses, after correcting for multiple comparisons, greater FT was associated with unpartnered status, non-retirement, and lower level of educational attainment. Greater FT was also significantly associated with HRQOL components of anxiety, fatigue, pain, physical functioning, and social functioning. FT was not significantly associated with any measured survivorship health behaviors. In multivariate analyses, FT was found to be a meaningful predictor of patient-reported anxiety, fatigue, physical functioning, and social functioning above and beyond theoretically and statistically relevant demographic characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall levels of FT were lower among cancer survivors in this sample, as compared with active treatment patients assessed in previous studies, financial burden continued to be a concern for a significant minority of cancer survivors and was associated with components of reduced HRQOL. Further research is needed to understand FT among underinsured survivors and those treated in community oncology settings. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Incorporation of FT assessment into survivorship care planning could enhance clinical assessment of survivors' FT vulnerability, help address the dynamic and persistent challenges of survivorship, and help identify those most in need of intervention across the cancer care continuum.

The Evolution of Un Abrazo Para La Familia: Implications for Survivors of Cancer.

Un Abrazo Para La Familia™ (Abrazo) is a 3-h modular preventive intervention designed for low-income caregivers who are co-survivors of cancer. Here we (1) consider the benefit to survivors of cancer, that is, the care recipients who participate in Abrazo; (2) summarize the literature specific to research outreach to low-income, underserved populations when they are faced with cancer; and (3) describe current steps being taken in Southern Arizona to reach these populations via Abrazo. Specific to considering the benefit to care recipients, we analyzed care recipient data derived from three existing cohorts of Abrazo participants. Analyses of the combined cohorts of these data demonstrate that Abrazo is effective with care recipients given statistically significant higher cancer knowledge and self-efficacy scores, pre- vs. post-intervention. We can now report benefit to care recipients who participate in Abrazo. This allows us, with confidence, to expand research recruitment efforts to include care recipients as part of the Abrazo intervention in our efforts to serve low-income, underserved populations when faced with cancer.

Lung Cancer Stigma: Does Smoking History Matter?

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer patients commonly report stigma, often attributing it to the well-established association of smoking as the leading preventable cause. Theory and research suggest that patients' smoking history may differentiate patients' experience of lung cancer stigma. However, there is inconsistent evidence whether lung cancer stigma varies by patients' smoking history, owing to limitations in the literature. PURPOSE: This study examined differences in lung cancer patients' reported experience of lung cancer stigma by smoking history. METHOD: Participants (N = 266, 63.9% female) were men and women with lung cancer who completed a validated, multidimensional questionnaire measuring lung cancer stigma. Multivariable regression models characterized relationships between smoking history (currently, formerly, and never smoked) and lung cancer stigma, controlling for psychological and sociodemographic covariates. RESULTS: Participants who currently smoked reported significantly higher total, internalized, and perceived lung cancer stigma compared to those who formerly or never smoked (all p < .05). Participants who formerly smoked reported significantly higher total and internalized stigma compared to those who never smoked (p < .001). Participants reported similar levels of constrained disclosure, regardless of smoking history (p = .630). CONCLUSIONS: Total, internalized, and perceived stigma vary meaningfully by lung cancer patients' smoking history. Patients who smoke at diagnosis are at risk for experiencing high levels of stigma and could benefit from psychosocial support. Regardless of smoking history, patients reported similar levels of discomfort in sharing information about their lung cancer diagnosis with others. Future studies should test relationships between health-related stigma and associated health behaviors in other stigmatized groups.

Tobacco Use Assessment and Treatment in Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review of Oncology Care Clinician Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Smoking after a cancer diagnosis negatively impacts health outcomes; smoking cessation improves symptoms, side effects, and overall prognosis. The Public Health Service and major oncology organizations have established guidelines for tobacco use treatment among cancer patients, including clinician assessment of tobacco use at each visit. Oncology care clinicians (OCCs) play important roles in this process (noted as the 5As: Asking about tobacco use, Advising users to quit, Assessing willingness to quit, Assisting in quit attempts, and Arranging follow-up contact). However, OCCs may not be using the "teachable moments" related to cancer diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship to provide cessation interventions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this scoping literature review of articles from 2006 to 2017, we discuss (1) frequency and quality of OCCs' tobacco use assessments with cancer patients and survivors; (2) barriers to providing tobacco treatment for cancer patients; and (3) the efficacy and future of provider-level interventions to facilitate adherence to tobacco treatment guidelines. RESULTS: OCCs are not adequately addressing smoking cessation with their patients. The reviewed studies indicate that although >75% assess tobacco use during an intake visit and >60% typically advise patients to quit, a substantially lower percentage recommend or arrange smoking cessation treatment or follow-up after a quit attempt. Less than 30% of OCCs report adequate training in cessation interventions. CONCLUSION: Intervention trials focused on provider- and system-level change are needed to promote integration of evidence-based tobacco treatment into the oncology setting. Attention should be given to the barriers faced by OCCs when targeting interventions for the oncologic context. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article reviews the existing literature on the gap between best and current practices for tobacco use assessment and treatment in the oncologic context. It also identifies clinician- and system-level barriers that should be addressed in order to lessen this gap and provides suggestions that could be applied across different oncology practice settings to connect patients with tobacco use treatments that may improve overall survival and quality of life.

Lung cancer stigma and depression: Validation of the Lung Cancer Stigma Inventory.

OBJECTIVE: In an effort to provide further evidence for the validity of the Lung Cancer Stigma Inventory (LCSI), this paper examined group differences in lung cancer stigma for patients who report clinically significant depressive symptoms and established a suggested scoring benchmark to identify patients with clinically meaningful levels of lung cancer stigma. METHODS: Patients (N = 231) who were diagnosed with lung cancer and treated within the past 12 months at one of two National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Cancer Centers located in the northeast and southern parts of the United States completed a single battery of questionnaires examining lung cancer stigma and depressed mood. Group differences, bivariate correlations, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Slightly more than a third of patients (35.9%) reported an elevated level of depression. There was a significant correlation (r = 0.44) between lung cancer stigma and depressive mood. The ROC curve analysis indicated an area under curve (AUC) of 0.71. A LCSI cutoff score of 37.5 yielded the optimal ratio of sensitivity (0.93) to specificity (0.70) for identifying patients with clinically meaningful lung cancer stigma. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with prior work, lung cancer stigma, as measured by the LCSI, was found to be moderately associated with depressed mood. Clinical investigators may use an LCSI total score above 37.5 (ie, greater than or equal to 38 on the LCSI scale of integer scores) as a clinical threshold for identifying patients who may be experiencing clinically meaningful stigma and may benefit from stigma-reducing interventions.

Structured Analysis of Empathic Opportunities and Physician Responses during Lung Cancer Patient-Physician Consultations.

Despite the importance of empathic communication in cancer patient outcomes, the majority of opportunities to respond empathically to a patient's concern within clinical consultations are "missed" (i.e., 70-90%), or not responded to by physicians. The present study examined the empathic opportunities and responses within clinical consultations of lung cancer patients and how these each are associated with patient-reported outcomes. Results indicate that lung cancer patients (n = 56) most commonly presented empathic opportunities related to emotions, anxiety was significantly associated with empathic opportunity type (p = .011), and physicians are most likely to respond with high empathy to statements around a patient making progress rather than bringing up a challenge or an emotion they felt (p = .031). The present study results highlight the need to train lung cancer physicians to respond with higher empathy to opportunities to respond to negative emotions, including mentions of challenges faced or emotions experienced, as these patients are at the highest risk of experiencing distress and the least likely to receive a high empathic response from physicians.

The Promoting Activity in Cancer Survivors (PACES) trial: a multiphase optimization of strategy approach to increasing physical activity in breast cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Despite the significant, empirically supported benefits of physical activity, the majority of breast cancer survivors do not meet recommended guidelines for physical activity. A variety of effective strategies to increase physical activity in breast cancer survivors have been identified. However, it is unknown which of these strategies is most effective or how these strategies might be combined to optimize intervention effectiveness. METHODS: The proposed trial uses multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) to evaluate four evidence-based intervention strategies for increasing physical activity in breast cancer survivors. We will enroll 500 breast cancer survivors, age 18 and older, who are 3-months to 5 years post-treatment. Using a full-factorial design, participants will be randomized to receive a combination: 1) supervised exercise, 2) facility access, 3) self-monitoring, and 4) group-based active living counseling. The primary outcome, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) will be measured at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months using an Actigraph GT3X+. To evaluate intervention effects, a linear mixed-effects model will be conducted with MVPA as the outcome and with time (3 months and 6 months) as the within-subjects factor and intervention (i.e., supervised exercise, facility access, self-monitoring, and active living counseling) as the between subjects factor, along with all two-way interactions. DISCUSSION: The purpose of the PACES study is to evaluate multiple strategies for increasing physical activity in breast cancer survivors. Results of this study will provide in an optimized intervention for increasing physical activity in breast cancer survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03060941 . Registered February 23, 2017.

Oregon's Familias en Acción replicates benefits for underserved cancer co-survivors through Un Abrazo Para la Familia.

OBJECTIVE: Our goal in this study was to determine if we could replicate initial findings when providing the intervention, Un Abrazo Para La Familia ("Abrazo"). Abrazo is a community-focused psychoeducational preventive intervention addressing the cancer information and coping needs of low-income, underserved family members of cancer survivors, developed and first implemented in Tucson, Arizona. METHODS: We used a preintervention and postintervention evaluation design to assess the effectiveness of replicating the Abrazo intervention with underserved Hispanic/Latino family members facing cancer as co-survivors. We describe lessons learned in an expansion of Abrazo from one region of the United States to another. RESULTS: Portland promotoras demonstrated that when the Abrazo intervention is provided via a culturally congruent, accessible format, the significant gains in cancer knowledge and self-efficacy reported by underserved co-survivors can be replicated. This is important because Oregon represents a US region different from Abrazo's origins in the Southwest. CONCLUSION: Our replication study provides a useful roadmap for others focusing on the psychosocial needs of Hispanic/Latino cosurviving family members of cancer. A manualized 12-hour training program based on the initial discovery and efficacy work was developed to train promotoras as a part of this study. The manual provides a clear protocol for others to replicate our intervention and evaluation procedures. Abrazo may be particularly important for family-centered care if the family does not have the cancer knowledge or self-confidence needed to fully participate.

Association between patient-provider communication and lung cancer stigma.

PURPOSE: The majority (95 %) of lung cancer patients report stigma, with 48 % of lung cancer patients specifically reporting feeling stigmatized by their medical providers. Typically associated with the causal link to smoking and the historically poor prognosis, lung cancer stigma can be seen as a risk factor for poor psychosocial and medical outcomes in the context of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment. Thus, modifiable targets for lung cancer stigma-reducing interventions are needed. The present study sought to test the hypothesis that good patient-provider communication is associated with lower levels of lung cancer stigma. METHODS: Lung cancer patients (n = 231) across varying stages of disease participated in a cross-sectional, multisite study designed to understand lung cancer stigma. Patients completed several survey measures, including demographic and clinical characteristics, a measure of patient-provider communication (Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Program or CAHPS), and a measure of lung cancer stigma (Cataldo Lung Cancer Stigma Scale). RESULTS: As hypothesized, results indicated that good patient-provider communication was associated with lower levels of lung cancer stigma (r = -0.18, p < 0.05). These results remained significant, even when controlling for relevant demographic and clinical characteristics (Stan. ß = -0.15, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that good patient-provider communication is associated with lower levels of lung cancer stigma, suggesting that improving patient-provider communication may be a good intervention target for reducing lung cancer stigma.